Welshers wrote:Look, I really like the guy as a person. He brings fire and is a good teammate. And he is a great football player and athlete. But he is not going to be worth how much we will need to pay him next year. So if we do we will either really screw ourselves with the salary cap by making him the highest paid safety in football, or we let him walk and that means we wasted all that draft capitol. I was excited when we traded for him but in hindsight I think it's a mistake. Like I said I like the guy, but he is a DB who doesn't do a lot in coverage. The Seahawks need better pass coverage. I believe JS and PC messed up on this one. Especially if Russ wants a better line, we can't be overpaying a SS. We hurt ourselves with that trade and it's very unlikely he is here beyond next year. I'd say trade him now like they were talking about doing after 1 season. Although I don't think that's happening either. Oh well.

jammerhawk wrote:It's hard to find All Pro players in the draft even when you are drafting early. Adams is a generational talent and will continue to create havoc in the opposing teams backfields for years. I predict as well he will surprise us as well with his abilities in coverage which i suspect will improve significantly in his 2nd season in the defence and with a return to health following his several surgeries post season.

For sure it was a big price to pay to get him (2-1sts and 1 -3rd) but his play certainly helped the team early, he made some key game saving tackles to , besides his record number of sacks. He's a player that has to schemed to protect against by opposing O's. To me he's worth paying and keeping as true difference maker. He is young and on the last year of a rookie contract for this season and will undoubtedly be a player the team will want to keep.

I guess we disagree about the player but I am 1000% with you on the real need to improve the OLine at LG and C and there needs to be some succession plan to replace Brown as well.

sdog1981 wrote:CoVID made all 2021 draft picks essentially worthless

massari wrote:

sdog1981 wrote:CoVID made all 2021 draft picks essentially worthless

The Seahawks could've gotten a stud RB like Najee Harris, Travis Etienne or Javonte Williams with that pick. Have no idea what other positions look like though.

Giving up a 1st+1st+3rd+$18M APY for a Safety

Maelstrom787 wrote:If they were gonna use the first rounders on running backs, I'd trade 10 of them for Jamal Adams.

Sgt. Largent wrote:10+ sacks with missing four games? You'd pay a DE 15M+ for that kind of production.

So no, I don't think the trade was a mistake. This defense DESPERATELY needed a playmaker like Adams to get the intimidation and sack production factor back.

Now am I nervous as hell that he's already breaking down, and we're about to hand him 50M+ when he might miss a bunch of games every year through this contract with injuries?

Absolutely. But IMO we don't have a choice. You gave up two first rounders, you have to sign him. Trading him for a far less package deal isn't an option for me.

jammerhawk wrote:

Sgt. Largent wrote:10+ sacks with missing four games? You'd pay a DE 15M+ for that kind of production.

So no, I don't think the trade was a mistake. This defense DESPERATELY needed a playmaker like Adams to get the intimidation and sack production factor back.

Now am I nervous as hell that he's already breaking down, and we're about to hand him 50M+ when he might miss a bunch of games every year through this contract with injuries?

Absolutely. But IMO we don't have a choice. You gave up two first rounders, you have to sign him. Trading him for a far less package deal isn't an option for me.

Here is his injury history, last year was tough for him and yet he set a record for sacks by a S and was a disruptive force despite having some significant injuries that interfered with catching a football and tackling though that wasn't noticeably a weakness.

https://sportsinjurypredictor.com/playe ... adams/9508

I don't know if he is breaking down due to injuries but the team will see on that front this coming season.

Maelstrom787 wrote:If they were gonna use the first rounders on running backs, I'd trade 10 of them for Jamal Adams.

Sgt. Largent wrote:10+ sacks with missing four games? You'd pay a DE 15M+ for that kind of production.

So no, I don't think the trade was a mistake. This defense DESPERATELY needed a playmaker like Adams to get the intimidation and sack production factor back.

sutz wrote:

Maelstrom787 wrote:If they were gonna use the first rounders on running backs, I'd trade 10 of them for Jamal Adams.

Ok, that got a .

massari wrote:

sutz wrote:

Maelstrom787 wrote:If they were gonna use the first rounders on running backs, I'd trade 10 of them for Jamal Adams.

Ok, that got a .

sdog1981 wrote:There are multiple things going on here.

First of all, CoVID made all 2021 draft picks essentially worthless. The draft is a crapshoot, add the CoVID disruptions to multiple levels of college football and the draft becomes a crapshoot with loaded dice.

Second of all Adams is not really a safety. He is a linebacker, in the modern spread offense NFL. KJ Wright and Jamal Adams play the same position conceptually in the defense. I have a feeling KJ will walk this off-season which means the 2021 Seahawks will have Adams, Brooks, Wager as the linebackers with Neal and Diggs as the safeties. More NFL teams are running three safety sets as a base defense and Adams will be that box safety/outside linebacker.

massari wrote:

Sgt. Largent wrote:10+ sacks with missing four games? You'd pay a DE 15M+ for that kind of production.

So no, I don't think the trade was a mistake. This defense DESPERATELY needed a playmaker like Adams to get the intimidation and sack production factor back.

Blitzing a Safety has huge consequence, and how many of his sacks were unblocked?

Marquise Blair, if healthy can blitz too.

Maelstrom787 wrote:Overvaluing running backs is a notable boomerism, though.

massari wrote:

Maelstrom787 wrote:Overvaluing running backs is a notable boomerism, though.

Overvaluing RB = taking in the late 1st early 2nd?

Fade wrote:They need to trade him. He will be constantly hurt and won't play through it once he gets paid. Made multiple "business decisions" when in the hole with the back throughout the season.

He can't cover, teams exploited this over and over. Seattle had to blitz him 10 times a game to find an effective role for him. Even then only got home 10% of the time. Leaving the defense in a coverage deficit 90% of the time. He doesn't fit the scheme, classic square peg, round hole.

He needs to be in an exotic scheme, preferably a 3-4. The Seahawks are a vanilla, fundamentally sound defense. Adams compromises that.

Sgt. Largent wrote:

massari wrote:

Sgt. Largent wrote:10+ sacks with missing four games? You'd pay a DE 15M+ for that kind of production.

So no, I don't think the trade was a mistake. This defense DESPERATELY needed a playmaker like Adams to get the intimidation and sack production factor back.

Blitzing a Safety has huge consequence, and how many of his sacks were unblocked?

Marquise Blair, if healthy can blitz too.

Lots of guys have the potential to be good blitzers, but until they prove it for years that's all it is, talk.

It's why guy like Adams get traded for two first rounders and break the bank come contract time, and other guys don't. Production.

If Blair comes back and proves he can be a star on this defense? I'm all ear. But until then? Nope.

Fade wrote:They need to trade him. He will be constantly hurt and won't play through it once he gets paid. Made multiple "business decisions" when in the hole with the back throughout the season.

He can't cover, teams exploited this over and over. Seattle had to blitz him 10 times a game to find an effective role for him. Even then only got home 10% of the time. Leaving the defense in a coverage deficit 90% of the time. He doesn't fit the scheme, classic square peg, round hole.

He needs to be in an exotic scheme, preferably a 3-4. The Seahawks are a vanilla, fundamentally sound defense. Adams compromises that.

Spin Doctor wrote:This trade is a mistake, 100 percent. You don't give up two firsts for a safety, end of story. It felt like a desperation trade to me. Jamal Adams also has a specific skillset. He's essentially another linebacker on the field. He's not great in coverage and got really exploited there. When we rush him we're taking somebody out of coverage as well. He also has a history of injuries and we're still don't have a long term solution at pass rusher.

The 2020 offseason was a real mess.

FresnoHawk68 wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:This trade is a mistake, 100 percent. You don't give up two firsts for a safety, end of story. It felt like a desperation trade to me. Jamal Adams also has a specific skillset. He's essentially another linebacker on the field. He's not great in coverage and got really exploited there. When we rush him we're taking somebody out of coverage as well. He also has a history of injuries and we're still don't have a long term solution at pass rusher.

The 2020 offseason was a real mess.

I get what your saying but I’m not convinced what your saying is true because Adams was hurt last year. We drafted 2 DE’s last year we have no choice but to give them a chance.

Spin Doctor wrote:

FresnoHawk68 wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:This trade is a mistake, 100 percent. You don't give up two firsts for a safety, end of story. It felt like a desperation trade to me. Jamal Adams also has a specific skillset. He's essentially another linebacker on the field. He's not great in coverage and got really exploited there. When we rush him we're taking somebody out of coverage as well. He also has a history of injuries and we're still don't have a long term solution at pass rusher.

The 2020 offseason was a real mess.

I get what your saying but I’m not convinced what your saying is true because Adams was hurt last year. We drafted 2 DE’s last year we have no choice but to give them a chance.

Yes, he was hurt but it was in his upper body. That doesn't affect where you position yourself in coverage. As for the DE's, we drafted a guy in the late round, how often do those work out? The other guy was a calculated risk that may never pan out. We got him so low in the draft because he had an injury that he may never fully recover from. Greene and Collier are JAGs, players that you can just about replace with anyone and not see a huge difference. Carlos Dunlap is a stop gap that we lucked upon mid season.

We have no real long term solution at pass rusher and haven't for years now. A pass rush is mandatory for fielding a good defense and we have nothing but a bunch of stop gaps, no concrete solutions. Despite this we traded for an inbox safety that is going to demand a lot of money. See where I'm going? The move didn't make much sense to me. Sure, from a short term prospective it improves the team, but the long term prognosis, especially after a large contract doesn't make much sense.

rcaido wrote:It was too much for a safety but im not sure im having buyers regret. He was awesome last year and clearly the best defensive player we have. he is only 25.

I rather cut ties w/ Reed 13million. Also try to get restructure Wagner 18million which he wont, so trade him.

Sgt. Largent wrote:

rcaido wrote:It was too much for a safety but im not sure im having buyers regret. He was awesome last year and clearly the best defensive player we have. he is only 25.

I rather cut ties w/ Reed 13million. Also try to get restructure Wagner 18million which he wont, so trade him.

If we don't want to pay Wagner the almost 40M he's owed over the next two years, then what makes you think another team would not only want to pay him, but also give up high picks?

Bobby can be mad that we're asking him to renegotiate, but that's how this goes. He's played very well, but not 18M and 21M well. So he should be expecting the phone call from John about re-doing his deal.

Just like every other vet at the end of a deal. Reed should expect that call, Dunlap should expect that call, Duane Brown should expect that call.

If Wagner thinks he can make more as a free agent after refusing? Then more power to him. I don't see it, but he might.

Welshers wrote:Look, I really like the guy as a person. He brings fire and is a good teammate. And he is a great football player and athlete. But he is not going to be worth how much we will need to pay him next year. So if we do we will either really screw ourselves with the salary cap by making him the highest paid safety in football, or we let him walk and that means we wasted all that draft capitol. I was excited when we traded for him but in hindsight I think it's a mistake. Like I said I like the guy, but he is a DB who doesn't do a lot in coverage. The Seahawks need better pass coverage. I believe JS and PC messed up on this one. Especially if Russ wants a better line, we can't be overpaying a SS. We hurt ourselves with that trade and it's very unlikely he is here beyond next year. I'd say trade him now like they were talking about doing after 1 season. Although I don't think that's happening either. Oh well.

FresnoHawk68 wrote:

Sgt. Largent wrote:

rcaido wrote:It was too much for a safety but im not sure im having buyers regret. He was awesome last year and clearly the best defensive player we have. he is only 25.

I rather cut ties w/ Reed 13million. Also try to get restructure Wagner 18million which he wont, so trade him.

If we don't want to pay Wagner the almost 40M he's owed over the next two years, then what makes you think another team would not only want to pay him, but also give up high picks?

Bobby can be mad that we're asking him to renegotiate, but that's how this goes. He's played very well, but not 18M and 21M well. So he should be expecting the phone call from John about re-doing his deal.

Just like every other vet at the end of a deal. Reed should expect that call, Dunlap should expect that call, Duane Brown should expect that call.

If Wagner thinks he can make more as a free agent after refusing? Then more power to him. I don't see it, but he might.

Seattle started preparing for Wagner’s departure when they drafted Barton doesn’t mean it will happen because Wagner has played high caliber football worth 18 million in my opinion. With Brooks on track to replace Wagner full time in 2022 this might be the time to trade him if they get the right price which should be a round 1 for Seattle. You may not believe Wagner is worth more than a round 1 but that doesn’t matter because Seattle probably does.

This draft should have good WILL prospects if that’s the case I think it will motivate Seattle to trade Wagner to Raiders for a round 1 pick & resign KJ Wright since KJ can teach all 3 LB positions.

jamescasey1124 wrote:Ok so if he is listed as ss, but plays mostly down by the line and disrupts, then who cares what his title is if he produces. Stop looking at specific positional titles vs what a player can actual do. Specially when we have other safeties who can ball. He is Sacks!!! I dont care what you call him. Gatorade bottle filler or towel boy. He ain't going anywhere. Plus he is more than sacks. He is backfield pressure consistently. Whether running plays or pass. I gurantee he is top of the league in negative plays and behind the line of scrimmage. He was worth more first rounders and then some. Ss, lb, de doesnt matter.

Maelstrom787 wrote:In the context of "I regret the Jamal Adams trade because it robbed Seattle of the chance to draft a running back with their highest pick," yeah. Even the great backs really don't provide much value over the replacement-level average back compared to other positions. Not just that, but the good ones come from all over the draft board.

It's fine to want draft capital back, but for running backs? Why?

massari wrote:Some stats:

Adams blitzed 98 times in 12 games, had 9.5 sacks. So about 90 times he was taken out of coverage without a sack.

He got to the QB untouched/unblocked all but 2 times, when he beat a TE against the Bills, and a RB against the Giants.

massari wrote:Some stats:

Adams blitzed 98 times in 12 games, had 9.5 sacks. So about 90 times he was taken out of coverage without a sack.

He got to the QB untouched/unblocked all but 2 times, when he beat a TE against the Bills, and a RB against the Giants.

misfit wrote:

massari wrote:Some stats:

Adams blitzed 98 times in 12 games, had 9.5 sacks. So about 90 times he was taken out of coverage without a sack.

He got to the QB untouched/unblocked all but 2 times, when he beat a TE against the Bills, and a RB against the Giants.

Personally, I think the Seahawks should go into next season and never blitz, because every time you blitz and don't get home you take people out of coverage. If we don't blitz all season long, we will leave more people in coverage and our defense will be much improved.